Happy Holidays Thank you #2

Please have a look at this... Our second complete AC for both "9" and "X".... And it fits our mission and real world emulated growth perfectly!!! Substitute for the 757 and 767!!

We hit $500M and we buy it!

Also.. the first view of the new modified " GLACIER TAIL" Please at least say you saw this.. No comments on the last one has me worried that they suck or that you can't see them! I spend a lot of time on these and hope they are OK.

Jeff

_________________

Last edited by Dogcreek on Sun Dec 23, 2012 1:04 am; edited 1 time in total

Let me know when your ready for a test pilot. The 787 is my VA's Cash hauler and on VAFS she is a fuel efficient cash making pig. Is this the Cam sim model? I've been using the Aerosim 787 payware, stay clear of it as it's buggy payware. Where does one get the Cam Sim model and do they have a official site? I love the glacier Tail.

Not to worry! I at least saw both posts; the short-field takeoff in the Buffalo was quite impressive!

The 787 is an impressive airplane to be sure, but the current numbers on the Boeing site don't quite seem to back the claim of the aircraft replacing the 757 and 767: the 787-800 (788) is shown with a maximum pax load somewhat less than for a 767-300, yet it's about 100,000 lbs heavier at MTOW. The 789 is about even in capacity with the 763...for an additional 50,000 lbs in MTOW. The 788 carries rather more pax than the 752, but again, it's twice as heavy.

One difficulty from my point of view is the absence, so far as I am aware, of a suitable panel. I have downloaded Camil's model, but attempts to alias one of my panels to this a/c have not been successful. A technical issue (more important to me than it might be to some) is that the 787 is a "bleedless" airplane, major portions of the pneumatic systems on earlier aircraft having been replaced by electrics: de/anti-icing, engine starting, cabin pressurization, etc.

I imagine as the design and it's technologies mature, it's numbers will improve...and hopefully, a decent panel will come along, soon.

I tried using my PSS757 panel, but it's soooooo unrepresentative; ditto the PSS777 panel. The real killer however, is that the FMCs in both cases are 'hard-wired', and don't adapt to the different weights, wing area, etc., of the Dreamliner.

I'm really, really looking forward to the new paint! Meanwhile, I'll be tweaking the .air file for my 'MD-83', making a JT8D-219 out of a JT8D-217. This is one job that takes longer for FS than it does in the real world!

Jeff, that's 2 of watching QW. As i Said im advising staying clear of the payware 787 by Aerosim. She has issues and Ive had all kinds of issues to the point I had a Military IT friend of mine pull apart there 787 and installer in the hunt for the problem. We have tried to make contact but to no avail. Oh well for the CS at Aerosim and I'm out 45 or so clams. On VAFS in the Fleet look for 787-3. That's the one i use on Canadian Arctic and she hauls 1,000,000 pounds of rubber dodo and victims lol. She's a cash cow with wings.

We better get used to the freeware version of the 787 as the QW model appears to be about a year away (late 2013) from release according to their forum. Hopefully we can come up with a decent panel to use in the interim.